Re: [PATCH] fix IO hangs

[Nick Piggin]

Jens Axboe wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 05 2003, Nick Piggin wrote:
>
> > Hi, sorry for the hangs, everyone. I think I have it worked out, but
> > testers and an ack from Jens would be good.
> >
> > The insert_here code now does as advertised. The big difference being
> > that regular blk_fs_requests will be subject to it (required for SCSI
> > requeue). Unfortunately ll_rw_blk.c misuses it and will sometimes try
> > to insert at requests which are not on the dispatch list, causing the
> > badness.
> >
> > It looks like the code was maybe used to provide an insertion hint
> > for the elevator. The RB tree has now eliminated that requirement even
> > if the code did work. Which it doesn't.
> >
> > I can't reproduce the hangs with this patch. Please test.
> >
> >
> > Aside, insert_here really seems to be quite dangerous to me. I think
> > combination of barriers and an "insert at start/end" flag would be
> > enough.
>
> Please just kill insert_here, it's exceeded its life expectancy. The 2.2
> io scheduler did a merge scan followed by an insertion scan, 2.3
> collapsed them into one scan as an optimization. Performance oriented io
> schedulers need to use better data structures.
>
> Best would be to change it to pass a request back even for the NO_MERGE
> case, if it has found a good insertion point. It's still a good idea to
> be able to pass hints back like this, as it could still be a viable
> optimization for _other_ io schedulers.

OK, that is sort of an ACK! Pending wider testing this patch needs
to get in.

Jens, if insert_here is dead, there is no point to passing back a hint
because it can't get back to the elevator anyway.

I'd very much like to kill insert_here and be done with it. If another
io scheduler comes along with a good use for it then the writers can
come up with an elegant solution ;) Hey, if they know a NO_MERGE return
means an insert will soon happen under the same lock, they could keep
it cached privately.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/